FGQD.L vs. BATG.L
FGQD.L (Fidelity Global Quality Income ETF) and BATG.L (L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FGQD.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the Fidelity Global Quality Income index, while BATG.L is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the Solactive Battery Value-Chain Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FGQD.L returned 11.86%/yr vs 17.37%/yr for BATG.L. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FGQD.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for BATG.L.
Performance
FGQD.L vs. BATG.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FGQD.L achieves a 10.28% return, which is significantly lower than BATG.L's 34.23% return.
FGQD.L
- 1D
- 0.18%
- 1M
- 3.19%
- YTD
- 10.28%
- 6M
- 9.93%
- 1Y
- 27.01%
- 3Y*
- 14.75%
- 5Y*
- 11.86%
- 10Y*
- —
BATG.L
- 1D
- -2.48%
- 1M
- -2.93%
- YTD
- 34.23%
- 6M
- 37.18%
- 1Y
- 127.95%
- 3Y*
- 24.89%
- 5Y*
- 17.37%
- 10Y*
- —
FGQD.L vs. BATG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FGQD.L Fidelity Global Quality Income ETF | 10.28% | 11.78% | 13.21% | 11.51% | -0.25% | 23.78% | 6.42% | 23.83% | -3.28% |
BATG.L L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF | 34.23% | 60.42% | 0.47% | 2.83% | -3.91% | 17.00% | 75.38% | 12.95% | -17.42% |
Correlation
The correlation between FGQD.L and BATG.L is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.54 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 24, 2018 | 0.63 |
The correlation between FGQD.L and BATG.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.45 (1 year) to 0.63 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
FGQD.L vs. BATG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FGQD.L
BATG.L
Technology
Financial Services
-
Industrials
Healthcare
-
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Basic Materials
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Technology
FGQD.L
BATG.L
Financial Services
FGQD.L
BATG.L
-
Industrials
FGQD.L
BATG.L
Healthcare
FGQD.L
BATG.L
-
Consumer Cyclical
FGQD.L
BATG.L
Communication Services
FGQD.L
BATG.L
-
Consumer Defensive
FGQD.L
BATG.L
-
Energy
FGQD.L
BATG.L
-
Basic Materials
FGQD.L
BATG.L
Utilities
FGQD.L
BATG.L
Real Estate
FGQD.L
BATG.L
-
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
FGQD.L vs. BATG.L — Risk / Return Rank
FGQD.L
BATG.L
FGQD.L vs. BATG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Global Quality Income ETF (FGQD.L) and L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF (BATG.L). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
| FGQD.L | BATG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.60 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.87 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.58 | 1.66 | -0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.86 | 9.45 | -5.59 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.82 | 32.41 | -15.59 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FGQD.L | BATG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.01 | 4.61 | -1.60 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.98 | 0.77 | +0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.87 | 0.80 | +0.06 |
Drawdowns
FGQD.L vs. BATG.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FGQD.L drawdown since its inception was -26.43%, smaller than the maximum BATG.L drawdown of -33.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FGQD.L and BATG.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FGQD.L | BATG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.43% | -33.37% | +6.94% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.93% | -13.61% | +6.68% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.90% | -33.37% | +16.47% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -16.90% | -33.37% | +16.47% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -4.18% | +4.18% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.90% | -8.99% | +6.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.59% | 3.98% | -2.39% |
Volatility
FGQD.L vs. BATG.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Fidelity Global Quality Income ETF (FGQD.L) is 1.88%, while L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF (BATG.L) has a volatility of 10.12%. This indicates that FGQD.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BATG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FGQD.L | BATG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.88% | 10.12% | -8.24% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.37% | 22.09% | -15.72% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.89% | 27.90% | -19.01% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.07% | 22.54% | -10.47% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.61% | 22.86% | -8.25% |
FGQD.L vs. BATG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
FGQD.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than BATG.L's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
FGQD.L vs. BATG.L - Dividend Comparison
FGQD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.81%, while BATG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BATG.L L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
FGQD.L Fidelity Global Quality Income ETF | 1.81% | 1.87% | 2.31% | 2.78% | 2.69% | 2.46% | 2.60% | 2.44% | 2.70% | 1.56% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FGQD.L and BATG.L have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FGQD.L is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FGQD.L is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for BATG.L.
FGQD.L is categorized as Global Equities, while BATG.L is Alternative Energy Equities. FGQD.L tracks Fidelity Global Quality Income index, while BATG.L tracks Solactive Battery Value-Chain Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Legal & General Investment Management. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for FGQD.L and 0.49% for BATG.L.
Find the right allocation for FGQD.L and BATG.L
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer